Why is it that the people of Wisconsin continue to put up with representatives who refuse to do their job.
Those democrat non-representing representatives makes a senseless statement that they are doing their job by not showing up to work would only fly with unions, but it certainly flies in the face of all common sense.
Again I ask why are the people of Wisconsin not screaming for a recall and get some people in those positions who will do the job they were hired to do? They work for US!!
If someone else walked off the job because they didn't like what the boss or the head of the company was proposing wouldn't those poeple be out of a job really fast. Why then do we suffer these non-representing representatives to stay in office. At this point they ought to be forced out of office and find people who will take their jobs seriously.
At this point I really don't care how they try to candy coat what they're doing. This is no different than the dopey teachers saying they're staying out of their classrooms for the students and that it's all about the students. Even though we now have it recorded they're doing what they're doing because it's all about the money and about the power!
They're not fooling anyone and the more we let them get away with it the more it sends the message to the media that their lies and propaganda are working and that we the people are really dumb powerless sheep and they can take and do what they want.
As I have said on many posts, if these people won't do their jobs and actually represent the good of the people... all the people of their state then get rid of the bums and let's get some honorable men in their places who will do their jobs with diligence and responsibility
Monday, February 28, 2011
Pelosi, Whatever is Politically Expedient
Pelosi would have had us believe that she was actually afraid of the Tea Party movement. Let's all be real about it. She was not afraid for her safety, she was afraid for her office. To date there has not been more than one instance known of violence committed by a Tea Party member in spite of the millions of people that have attended them.
Now let's look at the unions. First of all the people are being told to show up and are being bussed in by the unions at "union expense". More and more acts of violence by the unions are being seen and they are the ones provoking them. Yet do we hear anything from poor frightened Nancy Pelosi? Not a word! Why because she has nothing to fear from them because she's on their side. Yet these people are far louder, less law abiding (refusing to leave the capital building even so it can be cleaned) violent toward anyone that either doesn't agree with them or is even perceived as not being for them. They have attacked news people, and tea party people.
Consider how concerned Pelosi was about the Nazi symbols and images she claims were everywhere, again completely made up and nowhere to be found or at best the barest exception. Now we have the Unions declaring anyone that thinks they should do with even a little less or pay a little more toward their own benefits are like Mubarak and Hitler. Once again, is there even a single word from Pelosi, the White House or Reid about these things? You guessed it! Not a single word spoken against these things.
The media also has nothing to say about this, while during the Tea Parties they were going out of their way to create false photo sessions of black people carrying guns and then declaring that it was racists who were carrying them till it was brought out that it was a black man they had photographed and carefully cut so you couldn't tell it was a black man.
All of these antics and hypocrisies abound but little about them from the media is covered. There ought to be a great deal more about these situations but we hear very little.
The unions continue to confuse the issues and the media helps them do it. Walker is not against unions he is against unions in the public sector. I agree with him in this. It is not right that public workers, paid out of our taxes give our tax dues to union bosses who then funnel the money right back to the government where they go it from in the first place.
Money laundering is all it is. The government who is not allowed to take our tax dollars for the sake of campaigns and the like instead takes the money, gives it to public employees who give it to the union, who then give it back to the government representatives as campaign contributions? This is the very definition of money laundering.
These thugs are so afraid of losing their goose that lays the golden eggs that they are now becoming violent in their demands. This alone is a good enough reason to break them up. The fact that they are laundering the money for representatives also is just one more indication that the representatives ought to be investigated at the very least. I also believe that we ought to pass some lawn where no money from any public employee union can give given to any representatives campaign. I wonder then if they would start screaming about this.
I am far more afraid of violence from the union thugs then I ever was from the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party people are certainly emotional and engaged in their rights, but there is little question that they are peaceful. They are not looking to attack people physically. They are not looking to intimidate anyone but the representatives who have shown by their actions that they are simply not listening to the people or concerned with their oaths to uphold and defend the constitution.
It seems when it comes to Pelosi, Reid and Obama, they don't care about the violence as long as it is against those they disagree with. reporters, most especially Fox News reporters have been attacked on more than one occasion by the union activists and again the rest of the media is not covering it. I can't help but wonder how such a thing would have been on the news as long as they could have made it last if it had been a Tea Partier attacking a CNN host or the like.
Again the utter hypocrisy of the left is so apparent it makes you want to gag. The only thing that surprises me more is that anyone would even bother to read their rags any more. They have no real news to report. They have nothing but bias and propaganda to offer their readers. Yet no matter how many times they have been proved to ignore the facts or even make things up people still read them. Yet with Fox News it only takes one accusation of impropriety and it will be reported as fact for a week and no retraction will be printed even once it has been proved false.
These other news agencies and even our representatives will not change till we show them with our votes and with our dollars that we are not interested in hearing from them any more.
Where was the outrage and expression for more civility from Obama, and Pelosi when Rep. Gordon Hintz (D) was heard to shout “You’re f***ing dead!” at Litjens, a republican representatives. It is bad enough to hear this stuff coming from socialist and communist union members who are just looking to stir up violence and revolution with every inflammatory comment they can think of, but for something like this to come from the mouth of one representative toward another is shocking. Yet once again the media are no where to be found.
I wonder what if anything would be said it she actually ended up injured or dead? It seems these people feel the none existent comments of Tea Party people caused the violence in Arizona, but of course everyone knows the democrats are just tired when they do it and of course no one will take them seriously, even when the unions they back and who mutually back them are already openly engaging in violence with no repercussions from the law.
It is clearly nothing but hypocrisy and manipulation on the part of Pelosi, Reid, Obama and the complicate media. Of course I have little doubt that if even one Tea Party person even made a comment that could be twisted as a threat again it would be reported as the most heinous crime.
Now let's look at the unions. First of all the people are being told to show up and are being bussed in by the unions at "union expense". More and more acts of violence by the unions are being seen and they are the ones provoking them. Yet do we hear anything from poor frightened Nancy Pelosi? Not a word! Why because she has nothing to fear from them because she's on their side. Yet these people are far louder, less law abiding (refusing to leave the capital building even so it can be cleaned) violent toward anyone that either doesn't agree with them or is even perceived as not being for them. They have attacked news people, and tea party people.
Consider how concerned Pelosi was about the Nazi symbols and images she claims were everywhere, again completely made up and nowhere to be found or at best the barest exception. Now we have the Unions declaring anyone that thinks they should do with even a little less or pay a little more toward their own benefits are like Mubarak and Hitler. Once again, is there even a single word from Pelosi, the White House or Reid about these things? You guessed it! Not a single word spoken against these things.
The media also has nothing to say about this, while during the Tea Parties they were going out of their way to create false photo sessions of black people carrying guns and then declaring that it was racists who were carrying them till it was brought out that it was a black man they had photographed and carefully cut so you couldn't tell it was a black man.
All of these antics and hypocrisies abound but little about them from the media is covered. There ought to be a great deal more about these situations but we hear very little.
The unions continue to confuse the issues and the media helps them do it. Walker is not against unions he is against unions in the public sector. I agree with him in this. It is not right that public workers, paid out of our taxes give our tax dues to union bosses who then funnel the money right back to the government where they go it from in the first place.
Money laundering is all it is. The government who is not allowed to take our tax dollars for the sake of campaigns and the like instead takes the money, gives it to public employees who give it to the union, who then give it back to the government representatives as campaign contributions? This is the very definition of money laundering.
These thugs are so afraid of losing their goose that lays the golden eggs that they are now becoming violent in their demands. This alone is a good enough reason to break them up. The fact that they are laundering the money for representatives also is just one more indication that the representatives ought to be investigated at the very least. I also believe that we ought to pass some lawn where no money from any public employee union can give given to any representatives campaign. I wonder then if they would start screaming about this.
I am far more afraid of violence from the union thugs then I ever was from the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party people are certainly emotional and engaged in their rights, but there is little question that they are peaceful. They are not looking to attack people physically. They are not looking to intimidate anyone but the representatives who have shown by their actions that they are simply not listening to the people or concerned with their oaths to uphold and defend the constitution.
It seems when it comes to Pelosi, Reid and Obama, they don't care about the violence as long as it is against those they disagree with. reporters, most especially Fox News reporters have been attacked on more than one occasion by the union activists and again the rest of the media is not covering it. I can't help but wonder how such a thing would have been on the news as long as they could have made it last if it had been a Tea Partier attacking a CNN host or the like.
Again the utter hypocrisy of the left is so apparent it makes you want to gag. The only thing that surprises me more is that anyone would even bother to read their rags any more. They have no real news to report. They have nothing but bias and propaganda to offer their readers. Yet no matter how many times they have been proved to ignore the facts or even make things up people still read them. Yet with Fox News it only takes one accusation of impropriety and it will be reported as fact for a week and no retraction will be printed even once it has been proved false.
These other news agencies and even our representatives will not change till we show them with our votes and with our dollars that we are not interested in hearing from them any more.
Where was the outrage and expression for more civility from Obama, and Pelosi when Rep. Gordon Hintz (D) was heard to shout “You’re f***ing dead!” at Litjens, a republican representatives. It is bad enough to hear this stuff coming from socialist and communist union members who are just looking to stir up violence and revolution with every inflammatory comment they can think of, but for something like this to come from the mouth of one representative toward another is shocking. Yet once again the media are no where to be found.
I wonder what if anything would be said it she actually ended up injured or dead? It seems these people feel the none existent comments of Tea Party people caused the violence in Arizona, but of course everyone knows the democrats are just tired when they do it and of course no one will take them seriously, even when the unions they back and who mutually back them are already openly engaging in violence with no repercussions from the law.
It is clearly nothing but hypocrisy and manipulation on the part of Pelosi, Reid, Obama and the complicate media. Of course I have little doubt that if even one Tea Party person even made a comment that could be twisted as a threat again it would be reported as the most heinous crime.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Obama and Unions
For Obama to stand up and say that he would or will protest with the unions is frankly a little shocking in the light of him constantly TALKING about civility and trying to get along. All the while he is doing the only thing he knows how to do... community organizing which means stirring the pot, causing as much discontent as possible and setting people against each other.
Well did the devil learn his lesson from Jesus. Jesus said a house divided against itself cannot stand. He said this indicating that if he were the devil he could not be casting out demons, because a house divided against itself cannot stand. The devil understands this too and as such those who serve seek every opportunity to turn people against each other. This is the only path to power unless you want to take the path Jesus offered which was that of being a servant. This is clearly a path that Obama can never take. I have little doubt that in Obama's mind all he would be able to hear in that statement is SLAVE instead of servant, and this is something he will NEVER be!
Obama never sees service as truly valuable unless it is being offered to him. If it is not being offered to him I believe he only views that this is so because no recognizes that he is superior and worse they must be racist. It is not that he is offended that they don't see him as an equal it is that he is offended that they don't see him as superior.
I do not believe that Obama can ever truly understand the difference between leadership and ruling. In his mind they are the same. He does not understand that the key part of leadership is LEADING... this means that you go first and show others the way. In ruling you tell others where to go while you sit on your duff. We should not only question whether Obama is leading us, but also where he is leading us. Obama and too many of our leaders seem to be of the group that believes we need to be more socialist or communist in our world view. I still do not understand this mindset as it is certain that if they wish to live in a communist or socialist nation there are already plenty to choose from There is no need to turn this nation into one to live under such a SUPERIOR form of government.
For some reason it just feels unseemly for the president to get involved with riots, sitins, and protests. It puts him back on level as one of the masses with no power to change things only to implore the government. I find this absurd when you are talking about the POTUS. He is the most powerful man in the entire world and if we cannot do something then there is little that could be done by anyone else. For the president to even state that he would be out with the protesters is completely out of place. I understand he is trying to come across like one of the little people but he is not one of the little people.
As well as lowering the office of the presidency by doing this he is also stirring the pot to create more unrest and pit people against each other. Of course this is about what I would expect from a man with no real experience in power only in community organizing. It is shameful. It is sometimes hard to take the president seriously the way he inserts himself into situations.
There was no reason for the president to become involved in that situation with the black professor and the officer. It was certainly not something that needed presidential attention. But to make matters worse he went on to say that he "really didn't know anything about the situation, but the officer acted stupidly." Who was the one that was actually acting stupidly? Why did he do that? I believe it is because he is so attached to the race issue that he simply can't leave any issue regarding race alone no matter how minor that situation might be. Think how petty this makes him.
The president also seems almost pleased with himself that these protests are now spreading across the nation. The sad thing is that they are beng so misrepresented. They are being represented as protests for "worker's rights" or as protests for "union rights". Neither of these things is true. They are only aimed at the public unions. They do nothing toward the private unions at all. At least in my mind this makes good sense. There is a great problem with public worker unions. As Limbaugh points out so well it is basically a money laundering scheme. This cannot be emphasized enough. Consider, the people in the unions get their money from the government (read our taxes), the government gives them our money for pay, they give large sums of that money in dues to union leaders who then donate it back to the very representatives who allocated it.
What is the difference between this and the representatives simply allocating that money for themselves to start with? Is that what our taxes are for? Are our taxes ever supposed to go to support election campaigns for representatives? The answer is definitely NO. But our wonderful non-representing representatives have found a way to do that anyway and make it appear to be legal. This cannot be legal and is yet another thing that ought to be investigated. Thi ssame thing happened with the bail out of GM. The union got billions of dollars of which it then donated back to the representatives as a thank you for what they did.
If it weren't so serious it would be comical that unions have the gall to call their jobs middle class. Many of the people in public sector union jobs are making close to 140,000.00 per year. This is certainly not what I would consider middle class. They are managing to keep everyone cowed into silence about calling those jobs just what they are, greatly overpaid positions. We could hire 2 people for ever one we have now and they'd still be making a better living than the average (middle class) citizens.
It is time for some outrage on the part of the good people of this nation. Not violence mind you but certainly an outspoken outrage about what is going on. I don't mean just in the streets during a protest. I mean that people of good conscience should start speaking about these things in their local coffee shops and bars. Too often we are afraid to do anything but speak these things in whispers and we should be happy to speak what is merely common sense about these issues.
Well did the devil learn his lesson from Jesus. Jesus said a house divided against itself cannot stand. He said this indicating that if he were the devil he could not be casting out demons, because a house divided against itself cannot stand. The devil understands this too and as such those who serve seek every opportunity to turn people against each other. This is the only path to power unless you want to take the path Jesus offered which was that of being a servant. This is clearly a path that Obama can never take. I have little doubt that in Obama's mind all he would be able to hear in that statement is SLAVE instead of servant, and this is something he will NEVER be!
Obama never sees service as truly valuable unless it is being offered to him. If it is not being offered to him I believe he only views that this is so because no recognizes that he is superior and worse they must be racist. It is not that he is offended that they don't see him as an equal it is that he is offended that they don't see him as superior.
I do not believe that Obama can ever truly understand the difference between leadership and ruling. In his mind they are the same. He does not understand that the key part of leadership is LEADING... this means that you go first and show others the way. In ruling you tell others where to go while you sit on your duff. We should not only question whether Obama is leading us, but also where he is leading us. Obama and too many of our leaders seem to be of the group that believes we need to be more socialist or communist in our world view. I still do not understand this mindset as it is certain that if they wish to live in a communist or socialist nation there are already plenty to choose from There is no need to turn this nation into one to live under such a SUPERIOR form of government.
For some reason it just feels unseemly for the president to get involved with riots, sitins, and protests. It puts him back on level as one of the masses with no power to change things only to implore the government. I find this absurd when you are talking about the POTUS. He is the most powerful man in the entire world and if we cannot do something then there is little that could be done by anyone else. For the president to even state that he would be out with the protesters is completely out of place. I understand he is trying to come across like one of the little people but he is not one of the little people.
As well as lowering the office of the presidency by doing this he is also stirring the pot to create more unrest and pit people against each other. Of course this is about what I would expect from a man with no real experience in power only in community organizing. It is shameful. It is sometimes hard to take the president seriously the way he inserts himself into situations.
There was no reason for the president to become involved in that situation with the black professor and the officer. It was certainly not something that needed presidential attention. But to make matters worse he went on to say that he "really didn't know anything about the situation, but the officer acted stupidly." Who was the one that was actually acting stupidly? Why did he do that? I believe it is because he is so attached to the race issue that he simply can't leave any issue regarding race alone no matter how minor that situation might be. Think how petty this makes him.
The president also seems almost pleased with himself that these protests are now spreading across the nation. The sad thing is that they are beng so misrepresented. They are being represented as protests for "worker's rights" or as protests for "union rights". Neither of these things is true. They are only aimed at the public unions. They do nothing toward the private unions at all. At least in my mind this makes good sense. There is a great problem with public worker unions. As Limbaugh points out so well it is basically a money laundering scheme. This cannot be emphasized enough. Consider, the people in the unions get their money from the government (read our taxes), the government gives them our money for pay, they give large sums of that money in dues to union leaders who then donate it back to the very representatives who allocated it.
What is the difference between this and the representatives simply allocating that money for themselves to start with? Is that what our taxes are for? Are our taxes ever supposed to go to support election campaigns for representatives? The answer is definitely NO. But our wonderful non-representing representatives have found a way to do that anyway and make it appear to be legal. This cannot be legal and is yet another thing that ought to be investigated. Thi ssame thing happened with the bail out of GM. The union got billions of dollars of which it then donated back to the representatives as a thank you for what they did.
If it weren't so serious it would be comical that unions have the gall to call their jobs middle class. Many of the people in public sector union jobs are making close to 140,000.00 per year. This is certainly not what I would consider middle class. They are managing to keep everyone cowed into silence about calling those jobs just what they are, greatly overpaid positions. We could hire 2 people for ever one we have now and they'd still be making a better living than the average (middle class) citizens.
It is time for some outrage on the part of the good people of this nation. Not violence mind you but certainly an outspoken outrage about what is going on. I don't mean just in the streets during a protest. I mean that people of good conscience should start speaking about these things in their local coffee shops and bars. Too often we are afraid to do anything but speak these things in whispers and we should be happy to speak what is merely common sense about these issues.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Lawless President?
We have a president with no respect for the constitution or his constitutional limits. It seems he feels that the constitution should only apply to him when it pleases him. He recently had a long meeting with Eric Holder and they decided that the Defense of Marriage Act didn't seem to them to be constitutional and on that bases they are not going to uphold the law. This means that if anyone breaks this law they will not prosecute the case.
The last time I checked it was not up to the executive branch to determine whether a law was constitutional or not. This is the job of the courts not the executive branch. Obama and his minions have done this sort of thing on multiple occasions. So far they have not been challenged on it by either the courts or the congress. As long as this continues I fear they will not be challenged on it at all.
This ought to be deeply distressing to every American. It is bad enough that we have a president who doesn't feel the constitution applies to him, but worse still is that we have a congress and a judiciary branch that isn't willing to meet or act on their constitutional obligations to keep the executive branch in check. I for one find this very distressing. What can the end of this be except a severe constitutional crisis.
Our president has decided to disobey and disregard a court ruling stopping Obama and the administration from blocking drilling for oil in the gulf. No one said anything to confront this and the media had nothing to say to alert the people to this issue.
Obamacare was declared unconstitutional in toto and yet they continue to implement it. When a judge makes such a ruling the unconstitutional law must be halted in all its implementations until the issue has been resolved. Once again Obama and the administration want this so badly that they don't care what the judicial branch has to say.
Obama doesn't want to support the law against gay marriage.
It is his constitutional OBLIGATION to support and execute the laws of the land, not to decide whether they are constitutional or not.
what is his justification for these things? He has none. Instead he attacks, ridicules or ignores any that question him on these things. This is an outrage and it ought to make everyone wonder what is going on. There ought to be calls from the congress for investigations and even possible impeachment due to his violation and open opposition to the constitution and the laws of the land. He is setting himself above the law.
With each step beyond his constitutional boundaries he takes he ruins the constitution for all of us yet more. Eventually there will be no turning back from that. Why there is any room given to this man to do things which are clearly against the constitution is a mystery to me. If this had been during the time of our founding fathers I have little doubt that he would have been out of office after he ignored the first judge's ruling. Most certainly after the second. Obama would have been confronted so strongly on the first occurrence that he would have been afraid to commit another.
Any president who refuses to support and enforce the laws of the land is a president that should be in danger of impeachment. Where are the oversight committees and investigations into these things. There ought to be at least the threat of an impeachment. It would seem nothing else will get the attention of this president. He seems to feel that he only needs to comply with the laws that he agrees with. If he doesn't agree with them he doesn't seem to feel he needs to comply, enforce, or even support them.
When senators have sent letters to the president requesting information or explanation about some action he's taken he simply ignores it and makes no response. The senators then send another request, this game goes on 2 or 3 times and then it is set aside. The senators we have are gutless and unwilling to do their jobs. Why are some of the highest people in the land afraid to follow through and do their jobs? Is it simply that they agree with him but just want to make it look like they're trying to do something about it?
If our congress is not willing to exercise the power they have under the constitution but yet are more than happy to violate it at every turn when it benefits them maybe they need to be impeached or recalled as well. Some kind of message needs to be sent that we are not going to continue to look the other way when our leaders commit constitutional violations.
If we allow this from our leaders we are no better than they are. It is said that a people gets the government they deserve and we should certainly consider what we've done to deserve this government and if there is anything that can be done to reverse. On the other hand it may be that we actually want this government. I'm not sure that a people always get the government they want, but it seems fairly certain they will get the government they deserve.
The last time I checked it was not up to the executive branch to determine whether a law was constitutional or not. This is the job of the courts not the executive branch. Obama and his minions have done this sort of thing on multiple occasions. So far they have not been challenged on it by either the courts or the congress. As long as this continues I fear they will not be challenged on it at all.
This ought to be deeply distressing to every American. It is bad enough that we have a president who doesn't feel the constitution applies to him, but worse still is that we have a congress and a judiciary branch that isn't willing to meet or act on their constitutional obligations to keep the executive branch in check. I for one find this very distressing. What can the end of this be except a severe constitutional crisis.
Our president has decided to disobey and disregard a court ruling stopping Obama and the administration from blocking drilling for oil in the gulf. No one said anything to confront this and the media had nothing to say to alert the people to this issue.
Obamacare was declared unconstitutional in toto and yet they continue to implement it. When a judge makes such a ruling the unconstitutional law must be halted in all its implementations until the issue has been resolved. Once again Obama and the administration want this so badly that they don't care what the judicial branch has to say.
Obama doesn't want to support the law against gay marriage.
It is his constitutional OBLIGATION to support and execute the laws of the land, not to decide whether they are constitutional or not.
what is his justification for these things? He has none. Instead he attacks, ridicules or ignores any that question him on these things. This is an outrage and it ought to make everyone wonder what is going on. There ought to be calls from the congress for investigations and even possible impeachment due to his violation and open opposition to the constitution and the laws of the land. He is setting himself above the law.
With each step beyond his constitutional boundaries he takes he ruins the constitution for all of us yet more. Eventually there will be no turning back from that. Why there is any room given to this man to do things which are clearly against the constitution is a mystery to me. If this had been during the time of our founding fathers I have little doubt that he would have been out of office after he ignored the first judge's ruling. Most certainly after the second. Obama would have been confronted so strongly on the first occurrence that he would have been afraid to commit another.
Any president who refuses to support and enforce the laws of the land is a president that should be in danger of impeachment. Where are the oversight committees and investigations into these things. There ought to be at least the threat of an impeachment. It would seem nothing else will get the attention of this president. He seems to feel that he only needs to comply with the laws that he agrees with. If he doesn't agree with them he doesn't seem to feel he needs to comply, enforce, or even support them.
When senators have sent letters to the president requesting information or explanation about some action he's taken he simply ignores it and makes no response. The senators then send another request, this game goes on 2 or 3 times and then it is set aside. The senators we have are gutless and unwilling to do their jobs. Why are some of the highest people in the land afraid to follow through and do their jobs? Is it simply that they agree with him but just want to make it look like they're trying to do something about it?
If our congress is not willing to exercise the power they have under the constitution but yet are more than happy to violate it at every turn when it benefits them maybe they need to be impeached or recalled as well. Some kind of message needs to be sent that we are not going to continue to look the other way when our leaders commit constitutional violations.
If we allow this from our leaders we are no better than they are. It is said that a people gets the government they deserve and we should certainly consider what we've done to deserve this government and if there is anything that can be done to reverse. On the other hand it may be that we actually want this government. I'm not sure that a people always get the government they want, but it seems fairly certain they will get the government they deserve.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Obama and the Oil Crisis
I have just one question.
WHY DOES OBAMA CONTINUE TO STAND IN THE WAY OF OIL PRODUCTION AND DRILLING IN THE UNITED STATES? JUST BECAUSE HE HATES OIL BECAUSE IT'S NOT GREEN?
It's time we started drilling our own oil and that people start to protest Obama standing in the way of any oil drilling in our nation. Is he trying to destroy this country?
WHY DOES OBAMA CONTINUE TO STAND IN THE WAY OF OIL PRODUCTION AND DRILLING IN THE UNITED STATES? JUST BECAUSE HE HATES OIL BECAUSE IT'S NOT GREEN?
It's time we started drilling our own oil and that people start to protest Obama standing in the way of any oil drilling in our nation. Is he trying to destroy this country?
Friday, February 18, 2011
Workers Rights?
I'm so tired of hearing about workers rights? What rights are those? Are they clearly defined? Are they in the constitution? What are these people talking about?
It seems when they use these words it is much like the accusation of racism. It implies some inequity, some mendacity and some violation when in reality for the most part none ever exists. The accusation is enough.
Do people have a RIGHT to a pension? Do people have a RIGHT to retire? Do people have a RIGHT to a specific wage?
The reality is that what you have a right to do is to leave a job and look for another if you feel your employer is not paying you enough. The problem with the government and this misbegotten idea of rights is that people feel they have a right to stay where they are make whatever demands they want and expect they should get them.
This is not a right! Much as our representatives and government hates us talking about the Creator, the reality is that our founding fathers based much of the constitution on the concept of a Creator and of our rights flowing from him. When rights flow from the whim of the people those rights can also change on a whim.
We need to get back to the constitution and see what rights are enumerated there. It is most certainly a good place to start and unless we have very good reason it is probably a dangerous thing to start adding to those rights.
Too many people are confused between rights and wants. They seem to think because they want to do something it should mean that they either have or should have a right to do it. They seem to think that freedom means freedom to do whatever you please, whenever you please to whomever you please. These things are not the case.
We should also be clear that the GOVERNMENT has very few rights, while the people have many rights. We are now living in a country that thinks that the government is the one with all the rights. Our representatives think they have a right to all of our money through tax and that we ought to be grateful that they let us keep any of it. The situation is quite the other way around. The government should only get the money that we the people allow them to have. If they cannot live within their means then they need to cut back on what they're spending.
If our representatives are not willing to live within their means then we probably need to consider who it is we're voting in.
Our representatives love spending OUR money! They view this as THEIR right. Their rights are constrained and we need to start constraining them by voting those out that have this attitude at every opportunity we have till we have leaders that respect our hard work and OUR MONEY!
It seems when they use these words it is much like the accusation of racism. It implies some inequity, some mendacity and some violation when in reality for the most part none ever exists. The accusation is enough.
Do people have a RIGHT to a pension? Do people have a RIGHT to retire? Do people have a RIGHT to a specific wage?
The reality is that what you have a right to do is to leave a job and look for another if you feel your employer is not paying you enough. The problem with the government and this misbegotten idea of rights is that people feel they have a right to stay where they are make whatever demands they want and expect they should get them.
This is not a right! Much as our representatives and government hates us talking about the Creator, the reality is that our founding fathers based much of the constitution on the concept of a Creator and of our rights flowing from him. When rights flow from the whim of the people those rights can also change on a whim.
We need to get back to the constitution and see what rights are enumerated there. It is most certainly a good place to start and unless we have very good reason it is probably a dangerous thing to start adding to those rights.
Too many people are confused between rights and wants. They seem to think because they want to do something it should mean that they either have or should have a right to do it. They seem to think that freedom means freedom to do whatever you please, whenever you please to whomever you please. These things are not the case.
We should also be clear that the GOVERNMENT has very few rights, while the people have many rights. We are now living in a country that thinks that the government is the one with all the rights. Our representatives think they have a right to all of our money through tax and that we ought to be grateful that they let us keep any of it. The situation is quite the other way around. The government should only get the money that we the people allow them to have. If they cannot live within their means then they need to cut back on what they're spending.
If our representatives are not willing to live within their means then we probably need to consider who it is we're voting in.
Our representatives love spending OUR money! They view this as THEIR right. Their rights are constrained and we need to start constraining them by voting those out that have this attitude at every opportunity we have till we have leaders that respect our hard work and OUR MONEY!
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Confused Representatives and Gov't Officials
It would seem that those are among the highest positions in our government are quite confused about things. They seem to think the Tea Party is as dangerous or even more dangerous than the Muslim Brotherhood. As with so many things they would rather speak lies than look at the truth. Our leaders clearly have an agenda and propaganda is a large part of that agenda. Let us consider for a moment the difference between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Tea Party according to their own stated goals and articles.
The Muslim Brotherhood has a goal of advancing Islam worldwide…and all the repression that comes with it. They have been wrapped up in the Holy Land terrorism case, and have been fanning the flames in the recent Egyptian unrest. They want to take advantage of our openness in America to undermine our way of life. The creed of the Muslim Brotherhood
* Allah is our objective
* The Quran is our constitution
* The Prophet is our leader
* Jihad is our way
* Death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations
Yes, that sounds far less dangerous than the unofficial creed of the Tea Party movement:
* Respect for the U.S. Constitution
* Limited government
* Fiscal responsibility
* Opposition to irresponsible taxation
Does any of the above give any indication or lead anyone to believe there is any equivalence between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Tea Party? Only in the minds of our leaders which ought to tell you how competent they are to lead our nation. The leftist/socialist/communists who are for the most part in charge of our government are the real fear mongers. But then it is always good propaganda to accuse others of the very thing you're doing. This makes people look at them and not at you. It also means that while they're busy defending themselves they are not attacking you. Both of these are very old ploys exercised by the left.
If this is what the leaders of our nation think of those they are charged with SERVING then maybe we don't need their service anymore. We do not need to prove our worthiness, they need to prove theirs. The rest of the world is beginning to finally throw away multiculturalism, while we are still embracing it at full steam. Political correctness is clearly a failed way of thinking and it needs to be confronted at every point.
The philosophy of multiculturalism is that every other culture ought to take precedence over our own and that we ought to look down on ourselves while looking up to the other cultures that share our land. Why is it that no one ever asks how it is if our nations is so horrible that everyone wants to come here? If we are so bad and hateful then why are they not staying in their own nation. If their nation is so understanding and forward thinking with their socialist views then why come here and have to fight with the backwardness of capitalism? Why are questions like this never asked or addressed by the media? Thee is a simple answer to this. The reason these questions are not asked is because the answer is obvious and the media has another agenda. For some reason the media behaves as though they are trapped in this country as though we had an "iron curtain". We do not. Why don't these people just go to a communist or socialist nation, join the media there and rave about how wonderful that nation and its government are?
The Tea Party is most certainly not to be compared with the Musim Brotherhood! The Tea Party is looking to reclaim what the founders originally had in mind for our nation. If our current leaders consider this subversive it is only because those in the Tea Party recognize that the socialism and communism being put forward in our nation needs to be subverted before it gains any more hold over the people.
To the left socialism and communism ought to be the norm and therefore should not be question or impaired in any way. They feel they have an equal right in our nation. They behave as though the constitution has some clause in it that grants freedom of government. By this I mean that they think the constitution grants that we can decide what government we have any time we want. They behave as though there is no need to create that government through the constitutional process set down by our founding fathers.
I wish I could attribute all of this to simple confusion but it goes beyond confusion or incompetence. What is happening is both intentional and malevolent. The intentions of our non-representing representatives are being made clearer all the time. They are opposed to capitalism. They are opposed to America as it has always been and wish to make an America that is socialist or communist in nature.
Many of our leaders have made no bones about their position regarding the United States or the constitution. In too many cases it is clear they view the constitution as something opposed to what they want to do and treat it as though it is the constitution that is at fault, but it most certainly is not the constitution at fault. If our leaders do not like they constitution they must either change it through the means provided in the constitution. This alone ought to be more than enough for us to demand they step down from office. We cannot have people in office who are so openly opposed to the constitution. Did they not swear an oath to uphold and defend the constitution, yet aren't they the very ones who are attacking it.
If we do not raise our voices soon we may find we are forbidden from doing so. The lame duck session of congress was already able to pass a law essentially restricting freedom of speech on the internet. I'm sure they're aware of how hard it would be to strictly enforce, but then all they need to do is come down very hard and very publicly on only a few people which would then silence many other people through fear. Just the fact that such a law could be passed here in the United States ought to tell you just how serious the situation is.
You cannot afford to leave your representatives alone or unattended for a minute. Too many of them are voting and acting contrary to your constitutional rights. We have all grown weary of politics and our politicians know this and have been taking a great deal opportunity to rob us of our freedoms as we have slumbered.
The Muslim Brotherhood has a goal of advancing Islam worldwide…and all the repression that comes with it. They have been wrapped up in the Holy Land terrorism case, and have been fanning the flames in the recent Egyptian unrest. They want to take advantage of our openness in America to undermine our way of life. The creed of the Muslim Brotherhood
* Allah is our objective
* The Quran is our constitution
* The Prophet is our leader
* Jihad is our way
* Death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations
Yes, that sounds far less dangerous than the unofficial creed of the Tea Party movement:
* Respect for the U.S. Constitution
* Limited government
* Fiscal responsibility
* Opposition to irresponsible taxation
Does any of the above give any indication or lead anyone to believe there is any equivalence between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Tea Party? Only in the minds of our leaders which ought to tell you how competent they are to lead our nation. The leftist/socialist/communists who are for the most part in charge of our government are the real fear mongers. But then it is always good propaganda to accuse others of the very thing you're doing. This makes people look at them and not at you. It also means that while they're busy defending themselves they are not attacking you. Both of these are very old ploys exercised by the left.
If this is what the leaders of our nation think of those they are charged with SERVING then maybe we don't need their service anymore. We do not need to prove our worthiness, they need to prove theirs. The rest of the world is beginning to finally throw away multiculturalism, while we are still embracing it at full steam. Political correctness is clearly a failed way of thinking and it needs to be confronted at every point.
The philosophy of multiculturalism is that every other culture ought to take precedence over our own and that we ought to look down on ourselves while looking up to the other cultures that share our land. Why is it that no one ever asks how it is if our nations is so horrible that everyone wants to come here? If we are so bad and hateful then why are they not staying in their own nation. If their nation is so understanding and forward thinking with their socialist views then why come here and have to fight with the backwardness of capitalism? Why are questions like this never asked or addressed by the media? Thee is a simple answer to this. The reason these questions are not asked is because the answer is obvious and the media has another agenda. For some reason the media behaves as though they are trapped in this country as though we had an "iron curtain". We do not. Why don't these people just go to a communist or socialist nation, join the media there and rave about how wonderful that nation and its government are?
The Tea Party is most certainly not to be compared with the Musim Brotherhood! The Tea Party is looking to reclaim what the founders originally had in mind for our nation. If our current leaders consider this subversive it is only because those in the Tea Party recognize that the socialism and communism being put forward in our nation needs to be subverted before it gains any more hold over the people.
To the left socialism and communism ought to be the norm and therefore should not be question or impaired in any way. They feel they have an equal right in our nation. They behave as though the constitution has some clause in it that grants freedom of government. By this I mean that they think the constitution grants that we can decide what government we have any time we want. They behave as though there is no need to create that government through the constitutional process set down by our founding fathers.
I wish I could attribute all of this to simple confusion but it goes beyond confusion or incompetence. What is happening is both intentional and malevolent. The intentions of our non-representing representatives are being made clearer all the time. They are opposed to capitalism. They are opposed to America as it has always been and wish to make an America that is socialist or communist in nature.
Many of our leaders have made no bones about their position regarding the United States or the constitution. In too many cases it is clear they view the constitution as something opposed to what they want to do and treat it as though it is the constitution that is at fault, but it most certainly is not the constitution at fault. If our leaders do not like they constitution they must either change it through the means provided in the constitution. This alone ought to be more than enough for us to demand they step down from office. We cannot have people in office who are so openly opposed to the constitution. Did they not swear an oath to uphold and defend the constitution, yet aren't they the very ones who are attacking it.
If we do not raise our voices soon we may find we are forbidden from doing so. The lame duck session of congress was already able to pass a law essentially restricting freedom of speech on the internet. I'm sure they're aware of how hard it would be to strictly enforce, but then all they need to do is come down very hard and very publicly on only a few people which would then silence many other people through fear. Just the fact that such a law could be passed here in the United States ought to tell you just how serious the situation is.
You cannot afford to leave your representatives alone or unattended for a minute. Too many of them are voting and acting contrary to your constitutional rights. We have all grown weary of politics and our politicians know this and have been taking a great deal opportunity to rob us of our freedoms as we have slumbered.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Muslim Brotherhood 20%
It seems that all too many reporters are willing to brush aside the statistic that the Muslim Brotherhood only accounts for 20% of the vote in Egypt. These people seem unaware of the fact that it only takes 5% of the a country to be communist for the people to live under the thumb of dictatorship. Anyone who thinks some significant proportion of the population supports the dictator of North Korea or that a majority support the dictatorship in China, or any other communist nation are out of their minds. In most cases it is approximately 5%. So, in this case that means it should be no problem for the Muslim Brotherhood to exert their influence or completely rule in Egypt.
Our media seem to either live in a dream world, they are incapable of interpreting the facts, or they are simply lying to and trying to deceive the American people. I believe it is the latter of the three. The media seems to clearly support any cause that is communist or socialist at every opportunity. This support is easy to see if you look at the way they cover any story where socialists or communists are involved.
The American media is also either far too politically correct or at least not opposed to the goals of Islam. No matter how much evidence there is against the religious goals of Islam they refuse to mention anything negative about them.
It is difficult to look at the emerging story of Egypt without considering the media and its involvement. Almost from the start the media has clearly supported the uprising in Egypt. They have used as many incendiary terms as they dare. They have constantly called him a dictator. They have at no point mentioned the fact that Egypt has been a staunch ally of Israel and the United States. Why is this? Because they are at their root communists and socialists in their world view. They do would be more than happy if the United States was left with not one friendly nation in the world. I suppose they think this would lead to a socialist/communist United States, and they must further feel that because they somehow helped in the destruction of capitalism and freedom in this nation that they will be immune from the purges that invariably follow. Should they not like what begins to happen they will most certainly not be free at that point to write anything negative about it.
What is about to happen in Egypt I fear is not good. Too many people think that any change must by definition be good. Even as people seem to think that each successive generation must be better, smarter, more spiritual and more enlightened than the previous generation. They do not believe this because of any evidence. Indeed in many cases they believe it in spite of the evidence to the contrary.
It is this same ignorance that infects the media. History or evidence to the contrary that socialism or communism has never lead to any good for any nation that has accepted them makes no difference to them. Whether the media are honest about it or not they are ideologues. Of course they are going to spin the news that they are fair and balanced and even come up with some polls or the like to demonstrate this, but I do not believe people are really that gullible.
We need to take a closer look at what is happening in Egypt right now. It is very important that we understand where things are going and that things could well go very wrong there. If we are not willing to accept this could be the case then we are asking for problems.
The media is still not letting the news that things have finally broken in Egypt deter them from continual reporting on this issue to the neglect of domestic issues. The media is not able to walk and chew gum at the same time. It seems all they can do is report 2 or at most 3 stories at a time, over and over throughout the day, to the exclusion of all else. Rather than report 35-40 real stories in a day they report on 4 over and over. They don't simply report what has happened, but they feel they must interpret it for us. I suppose they think that we are too stupid to understand current events unless they explain them too us. Maybe this is true. There are certainly more than enough people graduating from high school who are functionally illiterate, as well as not even knowing where different states are. We are have congressmen in office who do not know what the difference between the constitution and the declaration of independence are. Somehow I don't really have any confidence that the media are any better off.
The other day our faithful media began to report, based apparently on nothing more than some rumor someone started, that Mubarak was going to step down. When the announcement came he declared he would be staying in office till September. Clearly they don't care about facts and would rather report on hearsay. Because of this and many other things I honestly don't trust the media when they start to give us information about how the Muslim Brotherhood has become more temperate. They have not changed what they believe or what they're goals are. They have merely changed their tactics. As Van Jones said, they're giving up the radical pose for the sake of the radical ends. This is the case for the Muslim Brotherhood as well. They are more than willing to appear moderate as long as they are able to accomplish their ends. They have been working at this for a very long time.
The Muslim Brotherhood is very patient about achieving their ends. We take their patience to mean that they have given them but. This again comes from assuming they are like us. We assume their religion is like Christianity. We assume this because we want to. We assume they are interested in peace because we assume they are like Christians. We assume this because we assume that all gods are the same and have the same demands on their followers as the Christian God. We cannot conceive that there are people who believe in gods of war, and who believe their God tells them to wage war on the unbelievers. Again we do this because we project our "modern" beliefs on others. This is not only invalid, but very dangerous because we are not facing things as they are. Our nation is headed for very deep trouble if we do not come to our senses and realize that the Muslim mindset is essentially at its root quite different from every other religion on earth except maybe satanism.
I'm sure they would be most appalled at someone saying this. But consider for just a moment what other religion in the world regularly puts out death sentences on any person that criticizes their religion. The fact that they have the gaul to call themselves tolerant is laughable. The only thing worse than that is that we agree with them and pretend they are tolerant.
Our media seem to either live in a dream world, they are incapable of interpreting the facts, or they are simply lying to and trying to deceive the American people. I believe it is the latter of the three. The media seems to clearly support any cause that is communist or socialist at every opportunity. This support is easy to see if you look at the way they cover any story where socialists or communists are involved.
The American media is also either far too politically correct or at least not opposed to the goals of Islam. No matter how much evidence there is against the religious goals of Islam they refuse to mention anything negative about them.
It is difficult to look at the emerging story of Egypt without considering the media and its involvement. Almost from the start the media has clearly supported the uprising in Egypt. They have used as many incendiary terms as they dare. They have constantly called him a dictator. They have at no point mentioned the fact that Egypt has been a staunch ally of Israel and the United States. Why is this? Because they are at their root communists and socialists in their world view. They do would be more than happy if the United States was left with not one friendly nation in the world. I suppose they think this would lead to a socialist/communist United States, and they must further feel that because they somehow helped in the destruction of capitalism and freedom in this nation that they will be immune from the purges that invariably follow. Should they not like what begins to happen they will most certainly not be free at that point to write anything negative about it.
What is about to happen in Egypt I fear is not good. Too many people think that any change must by definition be good. Even as people seem to think that each successive generation must be better, smarter, more spiritual and more enlightened than the previous generation. They do not believe this because of any evidence. Indeed in many cases they believe it in spite of the evidence to the contrary.
It is this same ignorance that infects the media. History or evidence to the contrary that socialism or communism has never lead to any good for any nation that has accepted them makes no difference to them. Whether the media are honest about it or not they are ideologues. Of course they are going to spin the news that they are fair and balanced and even come up with some polls or the like to demonstrate this, but I do not believe people are really that gullible.
We need to take a closer look at what is happening in Egypt right now. It is very important that we understand where things are going and that things could well go very wrong there. If we are not willing to accept this could be the case then we are asking for problems.
The media is still not letting the news that things have finally broken in Egypt deter them from continual reporting on this issue to the neglect of domestic issues. The media is not able to walk and chew gum at the same time. It seems all they can do is report 2 or at most 3 stories at a time, over and over throughout the day, to the exclusion of all else. Rather than report 35-40 real stories in a day they report on 4 over and over. They don't simply report what has happened, but they feel they must interpret it for us. I suppose they think that we are too stupid to understand current events unless they explain them too us. Maybe this is true. There are certainly more than enough people graduating from high school who are functionally illiterate, as well as not even knowing where different states are. We are have congressmen in office who do not know what the difference between the constitution and the declaration of independence are. Somehow I don't really have any confidence that the media are any better off.
The other day our faithful media began to report, based apparently on nothing more than some rumor someone started, that Mubarak was going to step down. When the announcement came he declared he would be staying in office till September. Clearly they don't care about facts and would rather report on hearsay. Because of this and many other things I honestly don't trust the media when they start to give us information about how the Muslim Brotherhood has become more temperate. They have not changed what they believe or what they're goals are. They have merely changed their tactics. As Van Jones said, they're giving up the radical pose for the sake of the radical ends. This is the case for the Muslim Brotherhood as well. They are more than willing to appear moderate as long as they are able to accomplish their ends. They have been working at this for a very long time.
The Muslim Brotherhood is very patient about achieving their ends. We take their patience to mean that they have given them but. This again comes from assuming they are like us. We assume their religion is like Christianity. We assume this because we want to. We assume they are interested in peace because we assume they are like Christians. We assume this because we assume that all gods are the same and have the same demands on their followers as the Christian God. We cannot conceive that there are people who believe in gods of war, and who believe their God tells them to wage war on the unbelievers. Again we do this because we project our "modern" beliefs on others. This is not only invalid, but very dangerous because we are not facing things as they are. Our nation is headed for very deep trouble if we do not come to our senses and realize that the Muslim mindset is essentially at its root quite different from every other religion on earth except maybe satanism.
I'm sure they would be most appalled at someone saying this. But consider for just a moment what other religion in the world regularly puts out death sentences on any person that criticizes their religion. The fact that they have the gaul to call themselves tolerant is laughable. The only thing worse than that is that we agree with them and pretend they are tolerant.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Egypt - What to Do?
It is certainly easier to criticize the president and the administration than to come up with clear workable solutions to the problem of Egypt. Still there are some things which can be clearly determined
1. Part of the concern is what will happen to our energy costs and national security?
2. Part of the problem is what will happen to Israel?
3. Part is what will happen to the people in Egypt?
4. Last is what will happen in the region, which in part applies to #1?
I put them in this order because I felt this was probably the order of most importance. It may be debated about 2 and 3, but I still think the order is correct.
To the first point, all I can say is shame on our government and administration. They have put the needs of snail darters and rodents above the needs of the people of the nation. They refuse to drill the oil we have and continue to make us dependent on the Middle East for our supply when we could easily be drilling a great deal of our own if the environmental Nazis would just get out of the way.
We have allowed our leaders to defy the will of the people with their runaway ecology policies whose real design is not a genuine concern for some animal but rather a concern for a way to exercise more power over the people without admitting it is about other things.
If our leaders were as concerned about our national security as they ought to be they would have been making sure for a very long time now that we had enough energy. It is clear in this industrial age that energy is paramount to the security of any nation. Without energy your armies will go nowhere, your factories will produce nothing. But, rather than make it a point that we have all the cheap energy we can get by producing more coal, natural gas, nuclear energy, and the like, we have a government determined to find the most expensive fuels with the least promise and then even deny us the use of the forms of energy we already have.
Would this make sense to anyone but a politician or an ecology nut? Yet this is the place we find ourselves in. We have a federal government that hates the military, when that is one of their primary responsibilities. The federal government was not set up to decide what food we eat, or whether we can hate someone or not; it was not set up to determine where we could build and where we couldn't; it was not set up to determine what type of trees we could put on our property; it was not set up to determine what should be considered obese and what could be done about it. The federal government was set up as an arbitrator between the states, for the defense of the nation, and for such things as treaties and international tariffs.
It has not been satisfied with letting the states govern themselves. It has also abrogated its responsibility in the other areas. We have incompetents in very high positions in our government. Some might even call them subversive, but I know many just don't want to think we could have such people in those positions. Consider that even after a judge decided that the moratorium on drilling in the gulf was wrong and overturned it how our president and the czars he chose simply ignored it. Consider how there has only been one new drilling permit issued since the spill in the gulf. Consider how our president and administration is again ignoring the law and the judges they disagree with by simply continuing to implement a health care plan that has now been deemed unconstitutional. Those we have in power are contemptuous and ignorant of the constitution. If anything they view it as an inconvenience.
I wonder can anyone name one thing this administration has done that has proven to be for the good and safety of the nation regarding our allies, and international politics? It recently came out that Obama gave secret information to the Russians (not an ally by any means) on the nuclear program of England, definitely one of our oldest and best allies. Is there any investigation? Is there any genuine concern about how this will affect such a good alliance for the sake of nearly nonexistent concessions on the part of Russia?
In answer to the second point, "What will happen to Israel?" It does not seem to be the least concern to our president or this administration what will happen to Israel. Again, they have been one of our 2 best allies for the last 50 years, and Obama seems to never miss an opportunity to oppose them and stand on the side of the terrorists. It almost doesn't matter who opposes them, Obama is determined to side with anyone except Israel. So, can we say that Obama has the concern of another of our friends and our only real ally in the Middle East in mind?
We need to find some way to make it very clear to Egypt and the surrounding nations that we will stand by Israel and the surrounding nations no matter what. We need to further make it plain that we will support them militarily and that we are done dealing with Hamas, and the Palestinians since they have done nothing to bargain in good faith. At this point they feel as supported or even more so than Israel. Should this really be the case?
It is of course a dangerous thing to make threats if you either can't carry them out or if you don't intend to. We have a president that is very big on words but they are the words of deception. This of course makes him an unknown, which though it can have its advantages in international relations can also have a downside because even your allies don't know what to expect from you.
One of the things that is a prerequisite for international politics or any other politics for that matter is the ability to bring people together. We need to understand that Obama's complete history and life practice has been about dividing people and driving wedges between them. He has seen this method to accomplish his ends. Though this method works when you're dealing from a position of weakness it does not work when you are dealing from a position of strength. At this point all it does is turn people against you and make it harder to accomplish your ends.
It is clear if nothing else that we must declare our allegiance to Israel and stand behind that in every action we take, even when we disagree with them. We must also make it very clear that even when we disagree with them that we will stand with them. In the case of Obama he seems to make it very apparent that if they don't do exactly what he says then he will set himself against them. This is not the behavior of a president or a diplomat; it is the behavior of a community organizer. It is give me what I want or I will make your life so miserable that you'll wish you had. What really is the difference between this and what terrorists do?
What happens to the people in Egypt?
To this question the first thing we ought to address is that Egypt ought to be at least as concerned about its own people as we are. It is not our job to be the policemen of the world. Nor is it our job to make sure that all other nations do what we think is in their best interest. Doing that means that we are really playing the role of rulers of the world and this is not something our founding fathers ever intended. What they intended was actually that we should stay out of world politics as much as possible and only get involved where our friends and allies were concerned. If nations want to be concerned allies well and good, but if not then we have nothing to do with them and make it clear that they better not do anything to us either. More and more it seems people are not afraid of what we might do.
Our change toward a politically correct view of war where we should never really go after a nation or country with destruction in mind. It is as though we have unlearned 4,000 years worth of war. War is of course messy. It is not meant to be surgical. It was not meant to be painless and only aimed at what individuals had already done something wrong. It has always been aimed at nations. The end result should be that the nation attacked stops fighting against you and submits. The Muslims certainly recognize this. The word Islam means submission. If we forget this is one of the primary aims of their religion we are bound to suffer grave consequences.
We do not have enough information about the parties involved to make any intelligent decision or give advice that might actually benefit them. They should no more expect that we will interject into their government than we would wanting another nation telling us which president or leader we should pick. We would most certainly view this as very offensive and I can't see how they would feel any other way about it either.
It is for that reason that I say I don't believe we should be pressing our views on Egypt unless we would expect them to do the same if the roles were reversed.
What of Stability in the Region?
I cannot see how this would be an issue if we were a little more concerned with taking care of our own issues. If we were more concerned about getting our own oil from our own vast resources we would be far better off. It is certainly a fact that we cannot behave as though we have our own resources. Our government has taken such a position against the people to prevent us from handling our own energy needs. This being the case we do have to be concerned about what may happen in the region. If we lose control at this point we may well find that we are in a lot of trouble regarding our energy needs.
It is possible that we may be able to make up those energy needs in a fairly short period of time were a crisis to present itself, but I fear with the president and congress we have right now even a crisis wouldn't be enough to fix the issue. It is certain that nuclear plants are not going to get built any time soon. Even though in most cases there are only a handful of people opposed to them, the situation is such that they manage to mobilize themselves and make it appear that there is a great deal more opposition to them than would be expected. It is also quite clear that the building of nuclear power plants takes years. We might be able to bring more oil and coal to market in a relatively short period of time, but beyond that I'm not sure we'll be able to make up for the difference of what we get from the Middle East.
For this reason stability in the Middle East or for that matter almost any region is desirable. About the only time you look for instability is when you plan on weakening an opponent. So if the desire of our president is to weaken someone then instability would definitely be desirable; otherwise I cannot think of a reason we should seek to see such a thing happen in this region of the world at this time.
It further does not add to the stability of the region when we show that we are not really going to stand behind our allies. It makes you wonder if anyone in our administration or upper levels of government understand anything at all about these situations? Where are our ambassadors? What are they doing? Why is there no input from them when they have been there all this time and certainly must recognize better than those who are far off what is happening.
We cannot find out anything reliable from the media at this point. Most of them are too busy trying to cover for the president and others are too enamored with the whole rioting and rebellion thing. They are like ravens fascinated with the latest shiny object.
It is a shame that we need to petition our media as much or more to do their jobs. It is bad enough that we should have to do that with our leaders, but to have to do it with the media when their job is to watch the government and yet they cannot be bothered to do anything but defend the president instead of doing their job and reporting on the president
1. Part of the concern is what will happen to our energy costs and national security?
2. Part of the problem is what will happen to Israel?
3. Part is what will happen to the people in Egypt?
4. Last is what will happen in the region, which in part applies to #1?
I put them in this order because I felt this was probably the order of most importance. It may be debated about 2 and 3, but I still think the order is correct.
To the first point, all I can say is shame on our government and administration. They have put the needs of snail darters and rodents above the needs of the people of the nation. They refuse to drill the oil we have and continue to make us dependent on the Middle East for our supply when we could easily be drilling a great deal of our own if the environmental Nazis would just get out of the way.
We have allowed our leaders to defy the will of the people with their runaway ecology policies whose real design is not a genuine concern for some animal but rather a concern for a way to exercise more power over the people without admitting it is about other things.
If our leaders were as concerned about our national security as they ought to be they would have been making sure for a very long time now that we had enough energy. It is clear in this industrial age that energy is paramount to the security of any nation. Without energy your armies will go nowhere, your factories will produce nothing. But, rather than make it a point that we have all the cheap energy we can get by producing more coal, natural gas, nuclear energy, and the like, we have a government determined to find the most expensive fuels with the least promise and then even deny us the use of the forms of energy we already have.
Would this make sense to anyone but a politician or an ecology nut? Yet this is the place we find ourselves in. We have a federal government that hates the military, when that is one of their primary responsibilities. The federal government was not set up to decide what food we eat, or whether we can hate someone or not; it was not set up to determine where we could build and where we couldn't; it was not set up to determine what type of trees we could put on our property; it was not set up to determine what should be considered obese and what could be done about it. The federal government was set up as an arbitrator between the states, for the defense of the nation, and for such things as treaties and international tariffs.
It has not been satisfied with letting the states govern themselves. It has also abrogated its responsibility in the other areas. We have incompetents in very high positions in our government. Some might even call them subversive, but I know many just don't want to think we could have such people in those positions. Consider that even after a judge decided that the moratorium on drilling in the gulf was wrong and overturned it how our president and the czars he chose simply ignored it. Consider how there has only been one new drilling permit issued since the spill in the gulf. Consider how our president and administration is again ignoring the law and the judges they disagree with by simply continuing to implement a health care plan that has now been deemed unconstitutional. Those we have in power are contemptuous and ignorant of the constitution. If anything they view it as an inconvenience.
I wonder can anyone name one thing this administration has done that has proven to be for the good and safety of the nation regarding our allies, and international politics? It recently came out that Obama gave secret information to the Russians (not an ally by any means) on the nuclear program of England, definitely one of our oldest and best allies. Is there any investigation? Is there any genuine concern about how this will affect such a good alliance for the sake of nearly nonexistent concessions on the part of Russia?
In answer to the second point, "What will happen to Israel?" It does not seem to be the least concern to our president or this administration what will happen to Israel. Again, they have been one of our 2 best allies for the last 50 years, and Obama seems to never miss an opportunity to oppose them and stand on the side of the terrorists. It almost doesn't matter who opposes them, Obama is determined to side with anyone except Israel. So, can we say that Obama has the concern of another of our friends and our only real ally in the Middle East in mind?
We need to find some way to make it very clear to Egypt and the surrounding nations that we will stand by Israel and the surrounding nations no matter what. We need to further make it plain that we will support them militarily and that we are done dealing with Hamas, and the Palestinians since they have done nothing to bargain in good faith. At this point they feel as supported or even more so than Israel. Should this really be the case?
It is of course a dangerous thing to make threats if you either can't carry them out or if you don't intend to. We have a president that is very big on words but they are the words of deception. This of course makes him an unknown, which though it can have its advantages in international relations can also have a downside because even your allies don't know what to expect from you.
One of the things that is a prerequisite for international politics or any other politics for that matter is the ability to bring people together. We need to understand that Obama's complete history and life practice has been about dividing people and driving wedges between them. He has seen this method to accomplish his ends. Though this method works when you're dealing from a position of weakness it does not work when you are dealing from a position of strength. At this point all it does is turn people against you and make it harder to accomplish your ends.
It is clear if nothing else that we must declare our allegiance to Israel and stand behind that in every action we take, even when we disagree with them. We must also make it very clear that even when we disagree with them that we will stand with them. In the case of Obama he seems to make it very apparent that if they don't do exactly what he says then he will set himself against them. This is not the behavior of a president or a diplomat; it is the behavior of a community organizer. It is give me what I want or I will make your life so miserable that you'll wish you had. What really is the difference between this and what terrorists do?
What happens to the people in Egypt?
To this question the first thing we ought to address is that Egypt ought to be at least as concerned about its own people as we are. It is not our job to be the policemen of the world. Nor is it our job to make sure that all other nations do what we think is in their best interest. Doing that means that we are really playing the role of rulers of the world and this is not something our founding fathers ever intended. What they intended was actually that we should stay out of world politics as much as possible and only get involved where our friends and allies were concerned. If nations want to be concerned allies well and good, but if not then we have nothing to do with them and make it clear that they better not do anything to us either. More and more it seems people are not afraid of what we might do.
Our change toward a politically correct view of war where we should never really go after a nation or country with destruction in mind. It is as though we have unlearned 4,000 years worth of war. War is of course messy. It is not meant to be surgical. It was not meant to be painless and only aimed at what individuals had already done something wrong. It has always been aimed at nations. The end result should be that the nation attacked stops fighting against you and submits. The Muslims certainly recognize this. The word Islam means submission. If we forget this is one of the primary aims of their religion we are bound to suffer grave consequences.
We do not have enough information about the parties involved to make any intelligent decision or give advice that might actually benefit them. They should no more expect that we will interject into their government than we would wanting another nation telling us which president or leader we should pick. We would most certainly view this as very offensive and I can't see how they would feel any other way about it either.
It is for that reason that I say I don't believe we should be pressing our views on Egypt unless we would expect them to do the same if the roles were reversed.
What of Stability in the Region?
I cannot see how this would be an issue if we were a little more concerned with taking care of our own issues. If we were more concerned about getting our own oil from our own vast resources we would be far better off. It is certainly a fact that we cannot behave as though we have our own resources. Our government has taken such a position against the people to prevent us from handling our own energy needs. This being the case we do have to be concerned about what may happen in the region. If we lose control at this point we may well find that we are in a lot of trouble regarding our energy needs.
It is possible that we may be able to make up those energy needs in a fairly short period of time were a crisis to present itself, but I fear with the president and congress we have right now even a crisis wouldn't be enough to fix the issue. It is certain that nuclear plants are not going to get built any time soon. Even though in most cases there are only a handful of people opposed to them, the situation is such that they manage to mobilize themselves and make it appear that there is a great deal more opposition to them than would be expected. It is also quite clear that the building of nuclear power plants takes years. We might be able to bring more oil and coal to market in a relatively short period of time, but beyond that I'm not sure we'll be able to make up for the difference of what we get from the Middle East.
For this reason stability in the Middle East or for that matter almost any region is desirable. About the only time you look for instability is when you plan on weakening an opponent. So if the desire of our president is to weaken someone then instability would definitely be desirable; otherwise I cannot think of a reason we should seek to see such a thing happen in this region of the world at this time.
It further does not add to the stability of the region when we show that we are not really going to stand behind our allies. It makes you wonder if anyone in our administration or upper levels of government understand anything at all about these situations? Where are our ambassadors? What are they doing? Why is there no input from them when they have been there all this time and certainly must recognize better than those who are far off what is happening.
We cannot find out anything reliable from the media at this point. Most of them are too busy trying to cover for the president and others are too enamored with the whole rioting and rebellion thing. They are like ravens fascinated with the latest shiny object.
It is a shame that we need to petition our media as much or more to do their jobs. It is bad enough that we should have to do that with our leaders, but to have to do it with the media when their job is to watch the government and yet they cannot be bothered to do anything but defend the president instead of doing their job and reporting on the president
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)